Peru trip!

Holy smokes, we bought our plane tickets!!!

We're flying to Lima, then to Cusco. We'll stay there 2 nights to acclimatize, then begin our 4-day Inca Trail trek in late August, to celebrate two graduations. Hubby finished his BA and I'll finish my MA.

We gotta start training!!! The 4 day Inca Trail hike is "only" 26 miles. Cusco is at about 11,000 ft, whereas Machu Picchu is at 8,040 ft. There are mountains between there. The highest point of the trail is over 13,000 ft. Criminy.

Interestingly, training for Peru will also help my project for my Action Research class this semester. It's all about getting in shape.

I figure if I can train the for 3-Day in the summer (with hubby's help), then we can train for Machu Picchu in the spring and summer. August is pretty much the grossest month here, so we should be well conditioned by then. We're planning to head up in altitude as much as possible and just hike as much as possible between now and then. We'll start close to home and then go farther up in elevation as the temperatures rise for the year.

I did the stairmaster at the gym for 20 straight minutes today without passing out - or realizing I'd gone that long. I thought I set the timer for 10 minutes, but the next time I looked down, the readout said 20 minutes. That's exciting.

Holy COW we're excited!!!

Technology is Worth It

For one of my classes, we had a group project to defend the position that it is worth it to invest in technology for training and education purposes. Our position paper is below.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Technology is Worth the Investment for Training and Education Programs

Team Giada
M. Finch, C. Rodriguez, J. Tipton
Learning Processes Applied to Instructional Technology
IT 6740 – Spring 2008

Technology is Worth the Investment

Our position is that technology is worth the investment for training and educational programs, to foster learning processes. Technology motivates students to be involved in planning and constructing their own learning; accommodates diverse learning styles, and increases social interaction. Opponents to this idea believe that the cost of technology will be higher than the benefits and that learning methods, such as critical thinking, will be ignored by technology. Currently, education is in a state of technological transition where students require both old and new skills in order to compete in the 21st century economy. Students achieve stellar results when technology drives learning processes.

Student Involvement

Students are motivated to be involved in planning their own education (Knowles, 1975). Students attending the Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage Summit in February 2008 indicated that they have a higher motivation to be involved in planning their own education using technology (Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage, 2008). The purpose of the Youth Summit was to increase students’ exposure to and appreciation of Colorado history. The youth’s responsibility was to recommend methods for other youth to learn about history. After touring four sites, they recommended the following:

1. Webcasts of information prior to, and interactive materials while walking on the Heritage Trail and the State Historical Museum. They wanted to be actively engaged in learning.


2. Podcasts of stories from past residents of the Governor’s Mansion and of scandals on the Heritage Trail. They wanted relevant stories delivered through technology.


3. Scale models of landmarks exhibited in the State Historical Museum, followed by live tours. They sought physical models, virtual tours, and then live exploration of the landmarks (Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage, 2008).

Without naming them, youth were asking for these learning processes:

1. Exploration and planning instruction – principles in Andragogy, Constructivist, and Experiential Learning theories.


2. Engaging interaction, a principle in Experiential Learning and Genetic Epistemology theories.


3. Multiple representations of content, a principle in Cognitive Flexibility theory.


4. Relevant experiences, a principle in Andragogy, Cognitive Flexibility, Experiential Learning, and Situated Learning theories (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Bruner, 1990; Bybee & Sund, 1982; Collins & Duguid, 1989; Knowles, 1975; Rogers 7 Freiberg, 1994; Spiro, Feltovitch & Coulson 1992).

Furthermore, if students not only plan instruction, but also develop it, they can learn more. When students create a podcast, they start with a challenge – what to create and how to create it. Their task-oriented, enterprise orientation fosters meaningful learning (Smith, 1998). Students use several learning processes to meet the challenge: First, they use problem solving and exploration to select from different recording methods. Next, they use collaboration with others, the important social aspect of learning (Smith,1998) to develop the content. Finally, they use critical thinking to edit and publish the podcast. By moving from receivers of information to creators, students use higher order processes. All these learning processes are part of Cognitive Flexibility theory (Spiro et al., 1992).

Diverse Learning Styles

People learn in different ways. There are a multitude of methods to categorize learners, such as Myers-Briggs and Learning Orientation. Each model shows preferences and the best ways to teach them. All models point to respecting diversity, a key principle of the Seven Principles of Good Teaching Practice (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1987). The most effective teaching approaches offer multiple representation of content, a key principle of learning in Cognitive Flexibility theory (Spiro, et al., 1992).

The overarching solution to diverse orientations is to offer diverse approaches. At best, the traditional class can vary approaches, but not simultaneously. Then, learners will prefer and be successful some of the time and will have to conform to a secondary method other times. In contrast, technology can provide parallel approaches to the same objectives, where learners can select the method that is most comfortable to them and offers them the greatest success.

Martinez (2002) describes how technology supports different learning orientations, including transforming, performing, conforming, and resistant learners. Technology provides opportunities for transforming learners who “place great importance on self-managed learning” (p. 107) to explore on their own and who are hampered by traditional, single direction methods. Interactive lessons and collaborative work are well-suited for performing learners, “skilled online learners who are typically self-directed in areas that they value” (p. 108). Well-structured webpages, precise instructions, and frequent feedback helps conforming learners, who need support from environment and social relationships. The fourth type, resistant learners, will gravitate to individual exploration, available through technology’s variety.

Increase Social Interaction

Student/student interaction and student/teacher interaction are key social principles for good practice (Brown et al, 1989; Chickering & Gamson,1987; Smith, 1992; Trinity College).

Technology provides a major advantage in student/student interaction. Electronic discussions, electronic document exchange, and email can help students interact with others by connecting:

1. Groups of students who are geographically close but socially distant.


2. Groups who are geographically distant.


3. Students who have difficulty attending a traditional class, such as disabled people, who can learn from a physically-supportive home office and may use software that improves communication, such as voice recognition (J. Tipton, personal communication, February 11, 2008).


4. People with conflicting time schedules. Asynchronous technology allows participation at times that accommodate each person’s schedule. Essentially, class operates 24/7.


5. Shy and aggressive people. Each must contribute equally to electronic discussions.

Technology also increases student/teacher interaction. Students get to know teachers through video portraits. Contact extends beyond traditional class time and office hours through email and electronic chats. Furthermore, the style of the interaction can improve. When technology is the source of information, the teacher's role shifts from knowledge dispenser to coach, mentor, and collaborator in the learning adventure. Teachers then contribute in the best human way to support learning (WestEd Policy Brief, 2002).

Counter-Argument: Does the Cost of Technology Equal its Benefits?

Educators agree that children should learn how to use a computer but disagree that computers are increasing higher achievement in core subjects. Lowell Monke (2004) suggests that the relationship between technology and learning is with technology, test scores are higher but the interaction between technology and the values learned in school are not addressed. If the fundamental priorities are not addressed, is technology worth its cost in the classroom?

Simulations on the computer cannot be compared to first-hand experiences of emotions and associations (Monke, 2004). Monke goes on to say, “…there is a huge qualitative difference between learning about something, […] and learning from something…” Learners need a concrete experience to draw from when they are trying to make associations with abstract information. Their participation is essential in making meaning out of their experience with objects, people, nature, and community. The learners’ intellect develops as a matter of interacting with the world around them (Ginn, 2008). If the technological classroom does not allow students to develop their intellectual creativity and personal growth, they might have a harder time competing in the global economy.

Neil Conan in an NPR interview with Todd Oppenheimer states “since 1990, the promise of better education with computers cost 70 billion dollars” (National Public Radio, 2004). Does the cost of technology equal its benefits? How are instructors prepared to use technology? The cost to stay-up-to-date with changing technology is having a major impact on schools. A 2004 case study was completed by the Consortium for School Networking for the Virginia District Public Schools to determine a cost estimate to implement technology in the district of 166,000 students. The total district cost was $233,059,569 or $3,255 per client computer. The estimates do not include costs for creating and maintaining the online campus and ongoing support, training, and technology updates (Consortium for School Networking, 2004). Instructors and vital classes such as art and music are being cut in order to make room for technology.

Technology should be viewed as a tool, not as the end to itself. Do students see technology as a form of entertainment or as a learning tool? Students should be learning critical thinking skills and how to solve problems instead of learning how to maintain a computer if they are going to be able to compete in the world.

Technology is cost-effective when it is used correctly for students to get basic skills. There is no turning back to a previous century or ignoring that technology is prevalent in other aspects of life. Teachers and trainers need education on the most efficient way of delivering lessons using technology.

Technology in Transition

"Our concept of literacy has been based on the assumption that print is the primary carrier of information in our culture and that the most important skills are those that enable students to understand and express themselves in text. The new definition of literacy is based on a different assumption: that digital technology is rapidly becoming a primary carrier of information and that the broader means of expression this technology makes possible are now critical for education. Text literacy is necessary and valuable, but no longer sufficient" (Meyer & Rose, 1998).

In the 21st century we live in a knowledge economy. Data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics in 1993 states 35% of public schools in the United States had Internet access and ten years later, that percentage increased to 99.5% (NCES, 2005). The data collected does not reflect combined elementary/secondary schools because of the small sample size, schools with missing data, and schools with free or reduced price lunch participation.

The 21st century is defined by technical change and social challenge, which makes for a confusing time for teachers and students. In the global economy students will have to combine old and new skills. Technology offers new teaching tools that are constantly changing and helps us accomplish things. Technology changes the way we do things.

Teachers will have to change how they use technology to teach, based on the understanding of how people learn.

“Research has established certain basic facts about the way our brains function that remain important no matter what is being taught or what new technologies become available to help teach it:

• Learning is a complex activity cooperatively carried out by systems in the brain that recognize patterns, that develop and exercise skills, and that motivate and organize action.


• Learning a skill requires effort and practice, and exercising a skill does not.


• Every individual learns differently from every other, bringing unique
  preferences and capabilities to the process” (Meyer & Rose, 1998).”

Because technology is causing an educational paradigm, we must adapt our teaching to the current culture while honoring time-tested learning processes. To prepare our learners to thrive in the 21st century global economy, we must help them become proficient in both old and new skills.

Conclusion

In examining the benefits of technology and the counter-arguments about technology’s cost in educational and training environments, we conclude the learning outcomes far outweigh the financial cost. In addition, we conclude technology enables learners to increase their social interaction by breaking down geographic, social, and physical boundaries; that technology allows us greater access to address diverse learning styles; and students are better able to be involved in the planning and constructing of their instruction with the use of technology. Technology is not a merely another cost, is it an essential investment in learning.

References

• Alliance for Childhood. (2000, September 12). Alliance for Childhood. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from Alliance for Childhood, What We are Doing and Who We Are: http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/computers/computers_articles_call_for_action.htm


• Brown, J.S., Collins, A. & Duguid, S. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.


• Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  Bybee, R.W. & Sund, R.B. (1982). Piaget for Educators (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.


• Chickering, A. & Gamson, Z. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. The American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, March, 1987. Retrieved February 9, 2008 from http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/


• Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage (2008, February). Presentation to Colorado Preservation Conference, Denver, Colorado.


• Consortium for School Networking. (2004, March). Virginia District Case Study. Retrieved February 12, 2008, from CoSN: Consortium for School Networking: http://www.classroomtco.org/2004_case_studies/virginia.pdf


• Ginn, W. Y. (2008). Jean Piaget - Intellectual Development. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from Piaget: http://www.sk.com.br/sk-piage.html


• Knowles, M. (1975). Self-Directed Learning. Chicago: Follet.


• Martinez, M.(2002). Audience Analysis and Instructional System Design for Successful Online Learning and Performance. In J.Woods & J. Cortado (Ed.), ASTD Training and Performance Yearbook (pp. 104-114). New York: McGraw-Hill.


• McCormick, P. Dealing with Learner Resistance to Technology-Delivered Training. In Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, Winter 01, 33-38.


• Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (1998). CAST: Chapter 5: Technology, Teaching, and Literacies Old and New. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from CAST Transforming education Through Universal Design for Learning: http://www.cast.org/publications/books/ltr/chapter5.html


• Monke, L. (2004). Forum: The Human Touch. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from Hoover Institution: http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/3259156.html


• National Public Radio. (2004, January 26). The Flickering Mind. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from NPR: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1617851


• NCES. (2005, Oct). Public Schools and instructional rooms with access to the Internet, by selected school characteristics: 1994 to 2003. Retrieved Feb 15, 2008, from Digest of Education Statistics: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/tables/dt04_424.asp?referrer=report


• Rogers, C.R. & Freiberg, H.J. (1994). Freedom to Learn (3rd ed). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Macmillan.


• Smith, Frank (1998). The Book of Learning and Forgetting. New York: Teachers College Press.


• Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.


• Trinity College, Why Use Instructional Technology? Retrieved February 7, 2008 from http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/cc/documentation/fachbk/primer/2primer.html


• WestEd Policy Brief. (2002, August). Retrieved February 9, 2008, from http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/po-02-01.pdf